BRAC 2005 Infrastructure Executive Council (IEC) Meeting ... · BRAC 2005 Infrastructure Executive Council (IEC) ... BRAC Report Capacity Responses to ... 25 Apr 2005 Report writing

Deliberative Document - For Discussion Purposes Only - Do Not Release Under FOIA

BRAC 2005 Infrastructure Executive Council (IEC) Meeting Minutes of December 21,2004

The Deputy Secretary of Defense chaired this meeting. The list of attendees is attached.

The Deputy Secretary opened the meeting by asking Mr. Wynne, Under Secretary of Defense (AT&L), to begin the discussion. Mr. Wynne then used the attached slides to guide the discussion, highlighting where the Joint Cross-Service Groups (JCSGs) are in the process and how the timeline is progressing. He noted that December 20,2004, was the deadline for the JCSGs to submit but all groups were finalizing their candidate recommendations. Mr. Wynne also stated that the Military Departments' deadline to submit candidate recommendations to the ISG and IEC is January 20,2005. When discussing the timeline, it was agreed that the briefing at the next IEC meeting should include a slide on the process milestones beyond May 2005.

Mr. Wynne then briefed the role of the IEC and briefly described a variety of measures such as Plant Replacement Value, square footage, buildings, and position reductions, which might be used to quantify the results of BRAC costs and savings. There was further discussion on these and other bases for metrics, such as payback, however no consensus was reached.

Mr. Wynne then reviewed the recent briefs that have been made to the Combatant Commanders (COCOMs) since October 2004 and reminded the IEC that, per the Secretary's instructions, OSD has taken actions to ensure the COCOM input is integrated into the process. Their respective feedback to the BRAC briefings was also provided to the Deputy Secretary.

Mr. Wynne presented the status of developing an update to the Force Structure Plan (FSP). Members expressed particular interest in ensuring that force structure decisions being made now must be captured in the updated FSP.

Regarding Homeland Defense, Mr. Wynne briefed that Criterion 2 of the Selection Criteria requires the Department to consider Homeland Defense missions. The Department would use existing Homeland Defense documents to determine the infrastructure necessary to support those missions. The Secretary of the Navy asked whether we should also consider coordinating with the Department of Homeland Security.

Mr. Wynne next discussed the process by which the IEC will consider and resolve conflicts, indicating that only conflicts that cannot be resolved at the ISG will be forwarded to the IEC for consideration and resolution. Additionally, if a Military


DCN: 5243


Department disagrees with an ISG decision on any issue, it can appeal that decision to the IEC.

Mr. Wynne concluded the briefing by reviewing next steps. He suggested that the "Red Team," which has been created for quality control purposes, might be invited to brief the IEC on their conclusions after reviewing the candidate recommendations.

The Deputy Secretary ended the meeting by emphasizing the importance of being bold with recommendations and he encouraged members to take advantage of this singular opportunity to rationalize DoD's infrastructure.

Approved:

Infrastructure Executive Council

Attachments: 1. List of Attendees 2. Briefing slides entitled "Base Realignment and Closure 2005, Briefing to the

Infrastructure Executive Council" dated December 2 1,2004



Infrastructure Executive Council Meeting December 21,2004

Attendees

Members: Mr. Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense Mr. Gordon England, Secretary of the Navy General Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps General John P. Jumper, Chief of Staff of the Air Force Mr. Michael W. Wynne, Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics)

Alternates: General Peter Pace, Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff Mr. Geoffrey Prosch, Assistant Secretary of the Army (I&E) General Richard A. Cody, Vice Chief of Staff of the Army Admiral John Nathman, Vice Chief of Naval Operations Mr. Peter Teets, Under Secretary of the Air Force

Others: Mr. Raymond DuBois, Director, Administration & Management Mr. Philip Grone, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations & Environment) Mr. Pete Potochney, Director, OSD BRAC Ms. Anne R. Davis, Special Assistant to the Secretary of the Navy for BRAC Dr. Craig College, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army Mr. Fred Pease, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force Major General Gary Heckrnan, Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff of the Air Force Mrs. Nicole D. Bayert, Associate General Counsel, Environment and Installations Mr. Dave Patterson, Special Assistant to the Deputy Secretary


1Deliberative Document –For Discussion Purposes Only –Do Not Release Under FOIA

BRAC 2005

Briefing to the Infrastructure Executive Council

December 21, 2004


Purpose

Process Overview/Timeline

BRAC 2005 Leadership and Organization • IEC Role

• CoCom Involvement

Force Structure Plan

Homeland Defense

Statutory Surge Requirements

Conflict Review and Resolution

Scenario Snapshot


CY 2003O N D

CY 2004J F M A M J J A S O N D

CY 2005J F M A M

Joint Cross-Service Groups

Military Departments ISG

Rev

iew

IEC

Rev

iew

Coo

rdin

atio

n

Rep

ort W

ritin

g

Finalize Recommendations

Final Selection Criteria

Draft Selection Criteria

Commissioner Nominations

Deadline

Capacity Data Call

Mil Value Data Call

Issued

SecDef Recommendations

to Commission

JCSG Recommendations

Due to ISG20 Dec

Process Overview

BRACReport

Capacity Responses to

JCSGs

MV Briefsto ISG

JPATsCriteria 6-8

Work

BRAC Hearings

Mil Value Responses to

JCSGs

Scenario Development

CapacityAnalysis

Military ValueAnalysis

MilDepsRecommendations

Due20 Jan

Scenario Development

CapacityAnalysis

Military ValueAnalysis

Start Scenario Data Calls

ScenarioDeconfliction


Timeline

20 Dec 2004 JCSG candidate recommendations due to the ISG

20 Jan 2005 MilDep candidate recommendations due to the ISG (for information and conflict identification only)

1-25 Feb 2005 Red Team Review

15 Mar 2005 (NLT) Submit Revised Force Structure Plan to Congress

15 Mar 2005 (NLT) President Nominates Commissioners

6-15 May 2005 SecDef Review

25 Feb 2005 ISG completes review of candidate recommendations

25 Feb – 25 Mar 2005 IEC review of candidate recommendations

25 Mar – 25 Apr 2005 Report writing

25 Apr – 6 May 2005 Formal Report coordination

16 May 2005 (NLT) Secretary transmits recommendations to Commission


BRAC 2005 Leadership & Organization

SEC ARMY SEC NAVY SEC AIR FORCE

Infrastructure Executive Council (IEC)Chair: DEPSECDEF

SECDEFMembership: (10) • Service Secretaries• Chairman, JCS• Service Chiefs• USD (AT&L)

ARMYAnalytical Teams

DEPT OF NAVYAnalytical Teams

AIR FORCEAnalytical Teams

IndustrialChair: Prin Dep USD (AT&L)

Supply & StorageChair: Director, Defense Log Agency

Education & TrainingChair: Prin Dep USD (P&R)

Headquarters & Support Chair: Deputy, Plans & Resources, Army

Technical Chair: Director, Defense Research & Eng

Membership: (10)• Vice Chairman, JCS• Military Department Assistant

Secretaries (I&E)• Service Vice Chiefs• DUSD (I&E)

Intelligence Chair: DUSD (Counter Intel & Security)

Infrastructure Steering Group (ISG)Chair: USD(AT&L)

7 JOINT CROSS-SERVICE GROUPS

MedicalChair: AF Surgeon General


IEC Role

Ensure SecDef priorities are realizedResolve conflicts among candidate recommendationsApprove final candidate recommendations from MilDep and JCSGsShape and Balance final package – Military JudgmentDefend (with JCSGs) recommendations to the Commission


Combatant Command InvolvementCOCOM input a valued part of the process• Concerns, mission impact, any alternatives

CJCS has statutory responsibility to consult with and seek advice from Combatant Commanders

Chairman and Vice Chairman representation on IEC and ISG, respectively, achieves this consultation role• Joint Staff representation on each JCSG• Joint Staff will channel CoCom concerns through scenario

review process

Chairman’s concurrence on candidate recommendations will include CoCom coordination


CoCom/Building Timeline

Oct DecNov MarFebJan

CoCom Briefs

The Building

OSD/JS CoCom Briefings #1

CoCom Inputs

OSD/JS CoCom Briefings #2CoCom “Reading Room”

Feb/Mar

Scenario Data CallsBegin

JCSGRecommendations

Due to ISG(20 Dec)

MilDepRecommendations

Due (20 Jan)

Note: SecDef Recommendations due to Commission: 16 May 05

JS informs CoComs of scenarios

STRATCOM (Complete as J8)

PACOM (25 Oct)

SOUTHCOM (1 Nov)

TRANSCOM (3 Nov)

NORTHCOM(22 Nov)

SOCOM(15 Nov)

JFCOM(2 Dec)

EUCOM(21 Dec)

CENTCOM(13 Dec)

October - December


Actions Pending/Complete

CoCom Com Brief Paired Scenarios Full Scenarios CoCom Last ScenProvided Provided F.B. Updt

NORTHCOM 22 Nov 10 Nov 10 Nov X 10 Dec

JFCOM 2 Dec 19 Nov 19 Nov X 16 Dec

STRATCOM **** 10 Nov 10 Nov X 2 Dec

TRANSCOM 3 Nov 3 Nov 10 Nov X 2 Dec

PACOM 25 Oct 9 Nov 9 Nov X 16 Dec

SOCOM 15 Nov 15 Nov 15 Nov X 16 Dec

SOUTHCOM 1 Nov 1 Nov 10 Nov X 2 Dec

EUCOM 21 Dec N/A 29 Nov

CENTCOM 13 Dec N/A 2 Dec

Phase One Phase Two

Complete UnscheduledScheduled

**** Cnx at request of ComSTRATCOM (previously briefed as J8)


BRAC Force Structure Plan (FSP)BRAC Statute requires the Department to develop a Force Structure Plan based on:• An assessment of the probable threats during the 20-year period

beginning with FY05• Probable end-strength levels and major military force units needed

to meet these threats• Anticipated levels of funding during this period

All BRAC recommendations must be based on the FSP and Selection Criteria

Department submitted FSP to Congress in Mar 04

Update, if necessary, must be provided to Congress NLT March 15, 2004


Force Structure Plan Update Status

Force Structure Plan is the foundation of all BRAC recommendations

Significant flux/TBDs that may not be resolved in time for consideration within BRAC• Air Force Squadrons• Ballistic Missiles and Missile Fields

Timing critical, otherwise BRAC must proceed without benefit of those decisions


Homeland DefenseCriterion Two requires consideration of Homeland DefenseThree Major elements• Homeland defense: defense against direct attacks to the United States, including

in the air and maritime approaches• Civil Support: DoD support requested by lead federal agencies and approved by

the Secretary of Defense• Enabling activities: DoD efforts to improve national and coalition capabilities

for homeland security, to include sharing expertise, technology, and training

Mission proponents• ASD (HD)• CMDR NORTHCOM/CMDR PACOM

Approach –• Use existing documents to determine necessary infrastructure

DoD Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support (Coordination Draft)• Consult with ASD(HD) and NORTHCOM & PACOM (through JCS J8)


Statutory Surge Requirements

Section 2822 of FY 04 NDAA• “assess the probable threats to national security and, as

part of such assessment, determine the potential, prudent, surge requirements to meet those threats.”

• The Secretary “shall use the surge requirements determination …. in the base realignment and closure process”

Section 2832 of FY05 NDAA • Modified the previously published BRAC selection

criteria to add “surge” to criterion three


Satisfying the Statutory Requirements

Determine surge “capabilities” needed to support the Force Structure PlanAssess capacity available to surge (Capacity Analysis)

Value the capability to accommodate surge (Military Value Analysis)

Assess surge during scenario analysis and retain difficult to reconstitute assets

Verify consideration of surge• JCSGs & MilDeps will report on how they determined surge

capabilities and captured surge in their candidate recommendation package


Conflict Review

A transformational BRAC will provide options on the table that challenge some long-held assumptions

Competing views centered on Military Value

Infrastructure Executive Council (IEC) is central to conflict resolution process


Potential Conflicts

Doctrinal – changing Service institutional approaches

Force Structure – one entity empties; one fills

Facilities – two entities vying for same asset

Culture – changing longstanding beliefs

Statutory – e.g., 50/50 Pubic-Private Depot workload

Others – e.g., Service vs JCSG authority


Emerging Conflicts

Doctrinal: JCSG recommendations may optimize DoD at the expense of one Service

• Candidate recommendations mayAlter Service training doctrineCombine Service entities into a single DoD entityMake one Service the customer of another entity

Facilities: 2 candidate recommendations may compete for limited capacity


Process for Reviewing and Resolving Conflicts

IEC Chair considers conflict• IEC Executive Secretary frames issue• Relevant IEC members/JCSG Chairs meet to discuss• General counsel/BRAC Director documents decision in

minutes or prepares options for full IEC meeting

IEC Chair presents:• Decision for IEC ratification; or• Options for discussion at full IEC meeting


+99 +61 +60 +30 +84 +48 +51 +59 +89 +88

136

235296

356386

470518

569628

717

805

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

# of

Sce

nario

s

Scenarios 136 235 296 356 386 470 518 569 628 717 805

7-Oct-04 8-Oct-04 15-Oct-04 22-Oct-04 29-Oct-04 5-Nov-04 12-Nov-04 19-Nov-04 26-Nov-04 3-Dec-04 10-Dec-04

Scenario Snapshot (as of 10 Dec)


Registered Closure Scenarios

NOTE 1: Yellow locations represent JCSG/MilDep cooperative efffort. Italics represent options, only one of which would be recommendedNote 2: Significant number of realignments in addition to these closures

Army Dept of the Navy Air Force JCSG Potential ClosuresFt Hamilton NS Pascagoula Cannon AFB Fort GordonCharles Kelley Spt Ctr NS Ingleside Grand Forks AF Fort HuachucaSelfridge Army Activities NS Everett Ellsworth AFB Blue Grass Army DepotPueblo Chem Depot SUBASE San Diego Onizuka AFB Tooele Army DepotNewport Chem Depot SUBASE New London Los Angeles AFB Walter ReedUmatilla Chem Depot NAS Atlanta Soldier System Center NatickDeseret Chem Depot NAS JRB Fort Worth Fort MonmouthFt Gillem NAS Brunswick NAS MeridianFt Shafter NAS Oceana NAS Corpus ChristiFt Monroe NAS Whiting Field Marine Corps Logistics Base AlbanyFt McPherson MCAS Beaufort NAES LakehurstCarlisle Barracks NAS JRB Willow Grove NSWC CoronaWatervliet Arsenal CBC Gulfport NSA New OrleansRock Island Arsenal NS Newport NS Pt MuguDetroit Arsenal Naval Postgraduate School National Naval Med Ctr BethesdaSierra Army Depot Navy Supply Corps School Moody AFBHawthorne Army Depot NAV Shipyd Norfolk or Portsmouth Brooks City BaseLouisiana AAP Rome LabLone Star AAPMississippi AAPKansas AAPRiver Bank AAP


Next Steps

Wedge Allocation Rules

• Base-lining of FY05 Budget (06?)

• Current Plan: Savings from Facilities and O&M lines will roll forward to add to the planned Wedge

Next IEC meetings

• January 2005 – April 2005 – 2 meeting each month

• May 2005 – 1 meeting

Documents

BRAC 2005 Infrastructure Executive Council (IEC) Meeting ... · BRAC 2005 Infrastructure Executive Council (IEC) ... BRAC Report Capacity Responses to ... 25 Apr 2005 Report writing